Botched Traffic Signals

Discussion about street lighting, road signs, traffic signals - and all other street furniture - goes here.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
User avatar
traffic-light-man
Member
Posts: 4723
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 18:45
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by traffic-light-man »

It's very likely it won't be on the same phase (an electrical circuit), but it is running in the same stage (essentially a group of the electrical circuits showing green at the same time).

I've actually seen that site previously and didn't like the arrangement for the reasons you've mentioned. I have seen situations like this before where a cycle 'crossing' terminates in a painted cycle lane, and therefore if the motor vehicles never cross either the cycle 'crossing' or the cycle lane, it's deemed not to conflict. I'm saying 'crossing' because these are too old to be marked out with elephant's feet, so they were typically completely unmarked.

I wouldn't feel comfortable setting it up like that personally, not without some kind of hard segregation for the cycle crossing to end up in.
Simon
jnty
Member
Posts: 1716
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2021 00:12

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by jnty »

traffic-light-man wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 15:07 It's very likely it won't be on the same phase (an electrical circuit), but it is running in the same stage (essentially a group of the electrical circuits showing green at the same time).

I've actually seen that site previously and didn't like the arrangement for the reasons you've mentioned. I have seen situations like this before where a cycle 'crossing' terminates in a painted cycle lane, and therefore if the motor vehicles never cross either the cycle 'crossing' or the cycle lane, it's deemed not to conflict. I'm saying 'crossing' because these are too old to be marked out with elephant's feet, so they were typically completely unmarked.

I wouldn't feel comfortable setting it up like that personally, not without some kind of hard segregation for the cycle crossing to end up in.
Seems like an easy win here to make things a bit more obvious might have been to signal the cyclists' right turn as a crossing movement over the crossing slightly further along, parallel to the bike movement. However, having to theoretically wiggle on and off the pavement at the far side is exactly the sort of nonsense that I hate when cycling, and regular users would probably just end up "wrongly" following roughly the layout as shown now. The current layout does seem like a recipe for a toot and a fright though. Totally agree that the best way of fixing this might be a bit more paint and a segregated entry point to aim for.
mr_marcrumbleton
New Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2021 21:02

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by mr_marcrumbleton »

Bfivethousand wrote: Tue Jul 21, 2020 16:32 I think it's fair to call these, these and this a botch. The regeneration work in the centre of Cirencester took place in Autumn 2016, yet in the summer of 2018 there were no less than SIX signal head installations still in place at the Market Place junction. And may still be for all I know...?

It's Cirencester though. Maybe they're listed? :laugh:
Some very well-preserved mellor signals there! Particularly the ones on the second link look like they've been restored, I've never seen one with glossy plastic before!
Jonathan24
Member
Posts: 210
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 19:45

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Jonathan24 »

mr_marcrumbleton wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 22:03
Bfivethousand wrote: Tue Jul 21, 2020 16:32 I think it's fair to call these, these and this a botch. The regeneration work in the centre of Cirencester took place in Autumn 2016, yet in the summer of 2018 there were no less than SIX signal head installations still in place at the Market Place junction. And may still be for all I know...?

It's Cirencester though. Maybe they're listed? :laugh:
Some very well-preserved mellor signals there! Particularly the ones on the second link look like they've been restored, I've never seen one with glossy plastic before!
Google confirms they were still there in August 2021!

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.7170454 ... 384!8i8192
User avatar
MotorwayGuy
Member
Posts: 997
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 15:37
Location: S.E. London

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by MotorwayGuy »

No right turn to where, exactly?
jnty
Member
Posts: 1716
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2021 00:12

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by jnty »

MotorwayGuy wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 21:14 No right turn to where, exactly?
Maybe the owner of that one driveway was causing absolute chaos? :lol:

Presumably that would also ban u-turns, which might be more of an issue?
User avatar
ReissOmari
Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 21:51
Location: Birmingham

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by ReissOmari »

ReissOmari..
User avatar
L.J.D
Member
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 06:34
Location: W.Yorkshire

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by L.J.D »

Gone now I think but isn't two green arrows on both approaches green at the same time a botch ?

Surely it would just be safer to let one arm at a time go. Also candidate for unique signals thread because I've never seen a set up like that before.
WhiteBlueRed
Member
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2022 03:58
Location: Krasnoyarsk, Russia

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by WhiteBlueRed »

L.J.D wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 01:30 Gone now I think but isn't two green arrows on both approaches green at the same time a botch ?

Surely it would just be safer to let one arm at a time go. Also candidate for unique signals thread because I've never seen a set up like that before.
There's nothing wrong with that in my opinion, the junction is big enough for right turners to safely pass "nearside to nearside", so there's not going to be any conflict. But I do agree it's a pretty unique setup.
WhiteBlueRed
Member
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2022 03:58
Location: Krasnoyarsk, Russia

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by WhiteBlueRed »

ReissOmari wrote: Sat Feb 05, 2022 23:18 This one made me laugh!

https://goo.gl/maps/Sdnqa9RTfEBD5o2o6
Not only did they use 2 "No Turn" signs (clutter) instead of an "Ahead Only" sign, but they also wrongly placed them. "No Right Turn" is on the left, and "No Left Turn" is on the right.
MotorwayGuy wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 21:14 No right turn to where, exactly?
My guess is they wanted to prohibit U-turns, used "No Right Turn" instead of "No U Turn". Banning a right turn does not ban U-turns, nor is a U-turn a "double right turn".
jnty
Member
Posts: 1716
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2021 00:12

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by jnty »

WhiteBlueRed wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 08:25
L.J.D wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 01:30 Gone now I think but isn't two green arrows on both approaches green at the same time a botch ?

Surely it would just be safer to let one arm at a time go. Also candidate for unique signals thread because I've never seen a set up like that before.
There's nothing wrong with that in my opinion, the junction is big enough for right turners to safely pass "nearside to nearside", so there's not going to be any conflict. But I do agree it's a pretty unique setup.
Yes, but the left turns will conflict with the opposite right turns surely?
User avatar
ReissOmari
Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 21:51
Location: Birmingham

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by ReissOmari »

jnty wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 09:31
WhiteBlueRed wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 08:25
L.J.D wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 01:30 Gone now I think but isn't two green arrows on both approaches green at the same time a botch ?

Surely it would just be safer to let one arm at a time go. Also candidate for unique signals thread because I've never seen a set up like that before.
There's nothing wrong with that in my opinion, the junction is big enough for right turners to safely pass "nearside to nearside", so there's not going to be any conflict. But I do agree it's a pretty unique setup.
Yes, but the left turns will conflict with the opposite right turns surely?
There's a junction here in Birmingham that has the exact same set up, and yes they do conflict as you can actually see in the GSV image, I assume drivers just use common sense, however coming to think of it, it is a botch as a green arrow would indicate right of way surely?
ReissOmari..
Pilgrim Dan
Member
Posts: 387
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 18:22
Location: Plymouth

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Pilgrim Dan »

WhiteBlueRed wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 08:27
ReissOmari wrote: Sat Feb 05, 2022 23:18 This one made me laugh!

https://goo.gl/maps/Sdnqa9RTfEBD5o2o6
Not only did they use 2 "No Turn" signs (clutter) instead of an "Ahead Only" sign, but they also wrongly placed them. "No Right Turn" is on the left, and "No Left Turn" is on the right.
But looking at it from a traffic flow POV it makes sense. They don't want traffic bearing right (ie passing to the right of the light) to turn left after the island, so the NLT is nearest that traffic, and vice versa for traffic bearing left.

If you go back in time the NLT used to be a NUT.
Merge posts in turn
jnty
Member
Posts: 1716
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2021 00:12

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by jnty »

ReissOmari wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 09:36
jnty wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 09:31
WhiteBlueRed wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 08:25
There's nothing wrong with that in my opinion, the junction is big enough for right turners to safely pass "nearside to nearside", so there's not going to be any conflict. But I do agree it's a pretty unique setup.
Yes, but the left turns will conflict with the opposite right turns surely?
There's a junction here in Birmingham that has the exact same set up, and yes they do conflict as you can actually see in the GSV image, I assume drivers just use common sense, however coming to think of it, it is a botch as a green arrow would indicate right of way surely?
Yeah - although the Highway Code is a little bit equivocal and Know Your Traffic Signs only concedes that a "GREEN ARROW showing at the same time [as a full green] indicates that turning right should be easier", I think convention would suggest that a right filter arrow should mean that conflicting traffic has a red. I guess the layout was chosen to signal that straight ahead isn't a permitted movement, which is quite hard to otherwise signal in advance.

I even find it jarring when a straight ahead filter shows with a full green in the opposite direction. There's no practical reason why this shouldn't be allowed but I guess it's quite unusual and 'feels' a bit wrong.
Last edited by jnty on Mon Feb 07, 2022 10:22, edited 1 time in total.
WhiteBlueRed
Member
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2022 03:58
Location: Krasnoyarsk, Russia

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by WhiteBlueRed »

jnty wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 09:31
WhiteBlueRed wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 08:25
L.J.D wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 01:30 Gone now I think but isn't two green arrows on both approaches green at the same time a botch ?

Surely it would just be safer to let one arm at a time go. Also candidate for unique signals thread because I've never seen a set up like that before.
There's nothing wrong with that in my opinion, the junction is big enough for right turners to safely pass "nearside to nearside", so there's not going to be any conflict. But I do agree it's a pretty unique setup.
Yes, but the left turns will conflict with the opposite right turns surely?
The lanes are wide enough for 2 cars to turn into it at the same time without conflicting, unless they were to change lanes (or more correctly, position).
User avatar
traffic-light-man
Member
Posts: 4723
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 18:45
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by traffic-light-man »

ReissOmari wrote: Sat Feb 05, 2022 23:18 This one made me laugh!

https://goo.gl/maps/Sdnqa9RTfEBD5o2o6
I was quite surprised by that as I always thought it was a NUT until the box got removed, I think unwillingly by a vehicle strike. It seems looking at GSV the NLT sign face was short lived before the NUT was returned. I wonder if it was an intentional attempt to try and sign that County Road traffic shouldn't turn left after the splitter island or it was just a genuine mistake by the maintenance contractor? Certainly looks strange nonetheless!

While the new design tidies up the junction to some extent, the pedestrian desire lines have clearly been ignored and replaced with extensive guardrail :roll:
L.J.D wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 01:30 Gone now I think but isn't two green arrows on both approaches green at the same time a botch ?

Surely it would just be safer to let one arm at a time go. Also candidate for unique signals thread because I've never seen a set up like that before.
Whilst the Mellors have now gone, the current installation still operates in the same way and still displays the arrows.

Legally, a substitute green arrow doesn't give any form of priority. Neither does a right turn indicative arrow, being simply an indication that oncoming traffic is facing a red signal. On the grounds that any arrow is usually used in a situation where there is priority by default and drivers have come to expect that, the guidance has since been changed to suggest that arrows should only be used in situations where there is priority. This installation would have most certainly predated that guidance though.

As a result, I don't think I'd be refurbishing it in the same way now - I think full greens with a no entry box sign fitted to the secondaries would be a nice compromise here.
Simon
jnty
Member
Posts: 1716
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2021 00:12

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by jnty »

WhiteBlueRed wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 11:24
jnty wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 09:31
WhiteBlueRed wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 08:25
There's nothing wrong with that in my opinion, the junction is big enough for right turners to safely pass "nearside to nearside", so there's not going to be any conflict. But I do agree it's a pretty unique setup.
Yes, but the left turns will conflict with the opposite right turns surely?
The lanes are wide enough for 2 cars to turn into it at the same time without conflicting, unless they were to change lanes (or more correctly, position).
Having conflicting lanes come into two adjacent lanes that would be very unusual in the UK, at least without some kind of marking through the junction and maybe a divider. In any case, the southbound direction only has one lane. The northbound direction is maybe just wide enough, but you'd certainly surprise the average driver if you tried to squeeze in next to them and one of you would have to yield immediately for the merge anyway. I think the intent is certainly that you'd give way turning right both ways.
WhiteBlueRed
Member
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2022 03:58
Location: Krasnoyarsk, Russia

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by WhiteBlueRed »

jnty wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 11:54
WhiteBlueRed wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 11:24
jnty wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 09:31

Yes, but the left turns will conflict with the opposite right turns surely?
The lanes are wide enough for 2 cars to turn into it at the same time without conflicting, unless they were to change lanes (or more correctly, position).
Having conflicting lanes come into two adjacent lanes that would be very unusual in the UK, at least without some kind of marking through the junction and maybe a divider. In any case, the southbound direction only has one lane. The northbound direction is maybe just wide enough, but you'd certainly surprise the average driver if you tried to squeeze in next to them and one of you would have to yield immediately for the merge anyway. I think the intent is certainly that you'd give way turning right both ways.
Here in Russia, it's common for some roads to be marked as "2 lanes", when it's actually wide enough for 4 lanes. The road outside of my microdistrict is like that. In peak hours people drive side-by-side as if it was a 4-lane road, and off-peak they park on the side of the road. I don't know why they're marked like that, since the same would be achieved by marking it 4 lanes as should've been done. And thankfully, the Road Rules don't prohibit multiple cars side-by-side in one lane.
User avatar
Chris Bertram
Member
Posts: 15721
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
Location: Birmingham, England

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Chris Bertram »

ReissOmari wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 09:36
jnty wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 09:31
WhiteBlueRed wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 08:25 There's nothing wrong with that in my opinion, the junction is big enough for right turners to safely pass "nearside to nearside", so there's not going to be any conflict. But I do agree it's a pretty unique setup.
Yes, but the left turns will conflict with the opposite right turns surely?
There's a junction here in Birmingham that has the exact same set up, and yes they do conflict as you can actually see in the GSV image, I assume drivers just use common sense, however coming to think of it, it is a botch as a green arrow would indicate right of way surely?
I've used the junction in Birmingham quite often (it's near our Aston office), and have never noted any issues. Lichfield Road here has two lanes in either direction, so traffic naturally fits into the lane nearest the side it has emerged from and sorts itself out up the road.
“The quality of any advice anybody has to offer has to be judged against the quality of life they actually lead.” - Douglas Adams.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
User avatar
traffic-light-man
Member
Posts: 4723
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 18:45
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by traffic-light-man »

I've just remembered that this one is also a similar arrangement, however oncoming traffic here sees a full green as they can also continue straight ahead.
Simon
Post Reply